Terrorism
Slaughtering humanitarian workers
A word of sympathy for the employees of the UN World Food Program who were viciously killed today in a suicide bombing in Islamabad. People on the antiwar left who voice outrage at U.S. drone attacks might want to say something in condemnation of this completely senseless, unprovoked and premeditated atrocity. Just a thought. The WFP, needless to say, is
Cheney: Supreme Court deliberations support terror
Not in so many words. But reading Jeffrey Toobin’s New Yorker piece on Chief Justice Roberts, I paused after this: Last year, Roberts dissented from Kennedy’s opinion for a five-to-four Court in Boumediene v. Bush, which held that the Military Commissions Act of 2006 violated the rights of Guantanamo detainees. And then I thought of this remarkable statement from Dick
The day in bigotry
From this NYT story on Coloradans who don’t want Guantanamo detainees moved to a nearby federal supermax prison: “People here are good Christian conservatives,” said Tom Baron, who described himself as a struggling small-business man, co-owner with his wife, Marie, of Donuts and Dogs, a coffee shop. Mr. Baron said he thought that large numbers of Muslims — the family
“Liberators”
Here at Lerterland we take a dim view of Israeli human rights abuses, and are annoyed by those who excuse them. We’re equally miffed by the tendency on the left to excuse Hamas’s antisemitism and vicious terror attacks, and to ignore altogether its clear record of violence against Palestinians themselves. The indispensable Human Rights Watch, all too often attacked for
A Pashtun demo
This, via Terry Glavin, is something remarkable: TORONTO – Pashtun-Canadians of Pakistan and Afghanistan origin are organizing an anti-Taliban rally to protest the ongoing massacre of Pashtun people in Northern Pakistan by the Taliban. In our first ever anti-Taliban rally in Canada we are protesting outside Queen’s Park to highlight the unreported “Genocide of 52 million Pashtuns” by the Taliban
Rosen PPS
I hadn’t seen Norm’s dissection of Nir Rosen before I wrote mine. It’s worth reading, and this line sums it up: [Rosen] has a moral argument he wants to make on the subject of attacking civilians and he makes it, but under cover of denying the resources of moral argument on that subject to everyone but the weak. His argument
Nir Rosen, propagandist
[Cross-posted at Z Word.] Glenn Greenwald links, with some caveats, to this piece by Nir Rosen as a “must-read” on the Gaza conflict. “…[Rosen’s] generalized explanation about how the concept of ‘terrorism’ is distorted and exploited by stronger countries can’t be emphasized enough.” What can’t be emphasized enough is that Rosen’s case is sophistry from start to finish. I’ve profited
Not 9/11
Amitav Ghosh weighs in, on today’s NY Times op-ed page.